Al-Qaeda Threatens to Nuke New York on February 2

[Nubclear]

Only the Palestinians? Are you anti-semite or something?

[Q Classic]

excellent.

now all they need to do is take care of LA, and then CHICAGO CAN REIGN SUPREME!!!!!!!!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

[Kuciwalker]

No, just it would solve the Mideast problem. It's difficult for, say, Yemen to send suicide bombers to Israel.

Especially when they're radioactive sludge.

[HalfLotus]

Why do so many Americans think it doesn't matter what the muslim world and the rest of the world thinks of our policies? It's always like, well, so and so pissed us off so we're gonna do whatever we damn well please in response. If we exercised a little more tact and restraint in international affairs, others may be less inclined to blow up our major metropolitan centers.

And newsflash, scaring people into submission with our big bad weapons doesn't work on fundamentalists. Winning muslim hearts and minds will make us alot safer from future terrorists attacks than waving our guns around. An ouce of prevention is worth a pound of cure you know.

Anyways, I don't think this particular threat is real, but nuking the Middle East into oblivion wouldn't make me feel better about losing an entire city worth of Americans.

[Nubclear]

If they got rid of LA, they'd be doing us a big huge favor

[GePap]

Originally posted by Sprayber
I dont think many people would be in a forgiving mood after several million people have been killed.

Yeah, like in 1919, 1945, 1954, 1975, 1979, so forth and so on. Newsflash: there are 6 billion people..the world moves on. It did after rwanda. And as I said, the Rwandas aceted relatively civily after 1/8 of their pop had been wiped out in 3 months and 1/5 of what was left had fled in fear of a retaliation, after 100k plus people had been active murderers of thier very neighbors. I don;t see anyone ever saying "The Hutu cause has been set back decades" even though Hutu extremists killed 100x in 3 months what Al Qaeada has killed in a decade.
But as I said, if the people of Rwanda could chose a resolution to the unimaginable horrors they saw (after the genocide, most dogs in Rwabda were killed becuase they were getting fat of the corpses-for the US to see similar percentages of killed, about 35 million Americans would have to die) that did NOT involve great violence. 1.5 million fled in fear of counter-genocide, something that did not happen and thus people came back. And I will state it again, if Americans prove themselves so weak of character and immoral that they would behave as lesser human beings than this (specially since your "average American" would know the killing only from TV and perhaps know someone killed, but just as likely not, while all rwandans knew killers and killed) example..then perhaps we don;t deserve to win.

NO one has yet to answer my question- anyone have any scenerios in mind hwne you guys open yer yaps? Any?

forgetting about Russia, China, and an increasingly anti-immigrant Europe there aren't you?

Europe's anti-immigrant rants have didly to do with 9/11, most Chinese could not care, and Russia makes up 2.5% of the world's pop. NEXT!

[Whoha]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3223939.stm

sure sounds like they don't care.

France,Denmark, Holland,etc all passing laws specifically targeting muslims sounds like they don't care either.

[GePap]

Oh wow, the Chinese government taking actions against gorups that might challange centralized government control..remember, 20% of humanity hates Falun Gong!

Wait, you mean all those countries that did not back pour little execise in Iraq, an attack people like yourself say is simply part of the consequences of 9/11?

So you are syaing the French as both anti-American causde they won't join you little "war on terrors" and at the same time are anti-terrorist by going after Muslims?

Make up your mind boy.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
This is obviously a scare tactic.

They are terrorists. That's their point. And it works.

[Whoha]

yea, because Falun Gong has mounted attacks that have killed Chinese like the muslims have.

My argument, and the original argument, is that the Muslims have pissed off most of the worlds major players, that has been demonstrated.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by GePap


Yeah, like in 1919, 1945, 1954, 1975, 1979, so forth and so on. Newsflash: there are 6 billion people..the world moves on. It did after rwanda. And as I said, the Rwandas aceted relatively civily after 1/8 of their pop had been wiped out in 3 months and 1/5 of what was left had fled in fear of a retaliation, after 100k plus people had been active murderers of thier very neighbors. I don;t see anyone ever saying "The Hutu cause has been set back decades" even though Hutu extremists killed 100x in 3 months what Al Qaeada has killed in a decade.
But as I said, if the people of Rwanda could chose a resolution to the unimaginable horrors they saw (after the genocide, most dogs in Rwabda were killed becuase they were getting fat of the corpses-for the US to see similar percentages of killed, about 35 million Americans would have to die) that did NOT involve great violence. 1.5 million fled in fear of counter-genocide, something that did not happen and thus people came back. And I will state it again, if Americans prove themselves so weak of character and immoral that they would behave as lesser human beings than this (specially since your "average American" would know the killing only from TV and perhaps know someone killed, but just as likely not, while all rwandans knew killers and killed) example..then perhaps we don;t deserve to win.

NO one has yet to answer my question- anyone have any scenerios in mind hwne you guys open yer yaps? Any?

Are you really this dense?

Are there no scenarios that you can imagine in which American strategic weapons would be employed against people other than the Russians or Chinese, rightly or wrongly?

Can you not imagine that a nuclear strike on the United States, or on most any other place in the Western world, would most likely trigger a very large reaction by all members of NATO, whether that be nuclear or not?

Give it a rest. What Ming said is that something like this would raise the intensity of the conflict. He is very right, and well he should be. Others said that the reaction might be severe, and that might be regretable. So, can you stop foaming at the mouth for a bit?

[Spiffor]

It is obvious the reaction of the US in case of a nuking would be extremely severe, and most probably misguided given that a terrorist group is nothing like a state.

And the terrorists would have won, because their aim from the beginning was to have war declared between the US/the West and the Arab world. They have already succeeded into raising the hatred between Westerners and Muslims, and they sure want to continue.

[notyoueither]

What happens if it is a Western European target, and the Yanks have the excuse domestically of the NATO treaty to back Europe's play?

How rational would Europe be if it were Paris or Berlin laying in a radioactive rubble?

I'm not convinced the US would go ape-****, but I do wonder what each of us would think were it our homes that were the targets.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by GePap


Yeah, like in 1919, 1945, 1954, 1975, 1979, so forth and so on. Newsflash: there are 6 billion people..the world moves on. It did after rwanda. And as I said, the Rwandas aceted relatively civily after 1/8 of their pop had been wiped out in 3 months and 1/5 of what was left had fled in fear of a retaliation, after 100k plus people had been active murderers of thier very neighbors. I don;t see anyone ever saying "The Hutu cause has been set back decades" even though Hutu extremists killed 100x in 3 months what Al Qaeada has killed in a decade.
But as I said, if the people of Rwanda could chose a resolution to the unimaginable horrors they saw (after the genocide, most dogs in Rwabda were killed becuase they were getting fat of the corpses-for the US to see similar percentages of killed, about 35 million Americans would have to die) that did NOT involve great violence. 1.5 million fled in fear of counter-genocide, something that did not happen and thus people came back. And I will state it again, if Americans prove themselves so weak of character and immoral that they would behave as lesser human beings than this (specially since your "average American" would know the killing only from TV and perhaps know someone killed, but just as likely not, while all rwandans knew killers and killed) example..then perhaps we don;t deserve to win.

Jesus, do you live to argue with people? Newsflash. I'm not talking about the rest of the ****ing world....... I dont give a **** about what the rest of the world does. I dont care care. I am saying that here in the United States of America, they will not be in the mood for forgiveness

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by notyoueither
I'm not convinced the US would go ape-****, but I do wonder what each of us would think were it our homes that were the targets.

Probably about the same as Skywalker. The gut reaction of hate and vengeance is perfectly understandable and human, that's why I don't blame it.

And that's precisely why scare tactics are so efficient. Should the terrorists succeed in nuking a capital city, we're basically doomed to enter their dreadful game.